Was Train Driving always hard to get into ?

[387star]

Before privatisation when wages rose exponentially were driver jobs still very difficult to aquire assuming you were in the industry and working perhaps as a secondman which used to be the entry route ? Some people suggest it's far more competitive now?

Whilst being paid more the job has in some ways gotten easier ie less traction knowledge required bit in others harder as you can't make any mistakes these days and everything is recorded

 

[baz962]

I guess it is probably harder in some and easier in others. Of course with the money and benefits , it will probably be more popular . I have spoken to many old school drivers and most reckon that they wouldn't pass the psychometric testing that is now used. As alluded to in another thread , incidents in the past would sometimes be waved away by the signaller and you can't do that now with data recorders etc. Less traction knowledge , but I would reckon that the rulebook is bigger. Also I know of quite a few that had dads in the grade and were literally told , you start on Monday. Nepotism was a big factor. So probably quite hard if you didn't have a relative in the job. So I would say it's always been harder than some jobs to get into.

 

[Horizon22]

It was certainly not as hard in late 80s and 90s - salaries were lower, terms not as good and there was a need to expand. That being said, it certainly wasn't a breeze.

 

[Taunton]

I think Ladbroke Grove was a significant wake-up for the industry. Not only in having taken straight in to substantial main line work someone not adequately trained for it, but also the whole management of the recruitment process. The accident driver for Thames Trains was among the first external recruitment, outside the traditional process, which they had done, and in turn it happened within days of him being passed out. The HR selection team, in turn, were from outside the traditional industry background. They were ripped apart by the enquiry at all levels for poor process.

 

[Horizon22]

I think Ladbroke Grove was a significant wake-up for the industry. Not only in having taken straight in to substantial main line work someone not adequately trained for it, but also the whole management of the recruitment process. The accident driver for Thames Trains was among the first external recruitment, outside the traditional process, which they had done, and in turn it happened within days of him being passed out. The HR selection team, in turn, were from outside the traditional industry background. They were ripped apart by the enquiry at all levels for poor process.

There was a whole cultural shake-up due to the report - a lack of signal sighting exercises, poor risk management, an unfounded wariness of new safety-critical systems, signallers accepting SPADs as "something that happened occasionally", little to no development of non-technical skills for drivers. And as you say, a deep review into driver recruitment and training.

 

[Taunton]

I accept the extensive failings all round at Ladbroke Grove, where like Southall everyone seems to have thought someone elses' roles in the process would suffice for safety. The question here was specifically about the recruitment process. I am guessing that, unlike say office jobs, there is the chance that there will be an incident, and then everyone's past role gone into in nit-picking detail.

 

[skyhigh]

And as you say, a deep review into driver recruitment and training.

I believe this also included a requirement that driver trainers must hold driver competency themselves. The people who trained the driver involved at Ladbroke Grove were not competent drivers.

 

[Gloster]

baz962 mentions nepotism. My feeling is that taking on family members of existing staff was a case of employing someone who was a known quantity and who could be expected to understand the requirements of the job. (I have been told of someone who was taken on several years after privatisation, who resigned after a few months because they hadn’t realised that nights were a regular part of their roster, not voluntary overtime.)

Railway jobs in general were not so sought after in BR days (*), particularly in areas with reasonably high levels of general employment, but once on the railway there were enough employees who wanted to be drivers to keep the numbers up to establishment. There might be occasional cancellations due to a sudden spate of retirements, illness, resignations, etc., but this was rare and there were usually plenty of grabbers who would work overtime. It was the low level station, PW or yard jobs with low wages and little overtime that could be difficult to fill in areas where there were plenty of jobs about.

* - As I have mentioned before, when I started at Guildford in 1978 it was basically a case of, “When can you start?”

 

[StephenHunter]

Well, in steam days, you had to start as a cleaner and work your way up...

 

[Dunnideer]

The accident at Hyde North Junction in August 1990 also brought a bit of focus onto driver selection and training, as well as the psychometric testing regime which had only been introduced in 1988. The collision involved a new and inexperienced driver who had struggled throughout the training. The report is available online here:

https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/HSE_Hyde1990.pdf

 

[mac]

My father worked on the railway and when i left school in 1978 it was a case of what job do you want to go to

 

[cossie4i]

Started on the YTS August 87.
During a work placement i kept seeing young lads going into a office. I asked the person in charge of me at my work placement what they was doing, he informed me they was having interviews to be secondmen.
I told him that’s what I wanted to do but the only way I could do that is if I started on the YTS.
He had a chat with the interviewers and arranged for me to have a interview when they had finished.
Very basic questions asked and I got the job.
Started my course in October 87, Driver’s appointment September 90, passed for Driving a couple of months after my 21st birthday in 91.
No psychometric testing for me, but I did actually pass it for GWR in the late 90s when I thought of moving.

 

[Taunton]

baz962 mentions nepotism. My feeling is that taking on family members of existing staff was a case of employing someone who was a known quantity and who could be expected to understand the requirements of the job.

This is actually common across the spectrum, father follows son, etc. There is actually an upside that they commonly already have a good understanding of what the job entails, and if they have an enthusiasm for it that trumps a considerable amount of attitude training. This is not nepotism, which is INAPPROPRIATE selection based on your antecedents.

Classic example was on TV a while ago, senior surgeon said his two teenage sons had long been interested in following his career. That's 6 years at university. Each. Which is £9,000 for fees. £108,000 for them to follow their enthusiasm and follow him. Out of taxed income. Some things have a downside. And something that rail drivers don't have.

 

[baz962]

This is actually common across the spectrum, father follows son, etc. There is actually an upside that they commonly already have a good understanding of what the job entails, and if they have an enthusiasm for it that trumps a considerable amount of attitude training. This is not nepotism, which is INAPPROPRIATE selection based on your antecedents.

Classic example was on TV a while ago, senior surgeon said his two teenage sons had long been interested in following his career. That's 6 years at university. Each. Which is £9,000 for fees. £108,000 for them to follow their enthusiasm and follow him. Out of taxed income. Some things have a downside. And something that rail drivers don't have.

According to the dictionary , it's using power or influence to give your family an unfair advantage. So I beg to differ , it was nepotism.

 

[dk1]

I didn’t go straight into driving, in fact I waited 14 years. I did however get onto the railway thanks to a close female friend who’s father frequented my parents pub.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I accept the extensive failings all round at Ladbroke Grove, where like Southall everyone seems to have thought someone elses' roles in the process would suffice for safety. The question here was specifically about the recruitment process. I am guessing that, unlike say office jobs, there is the chance that there will be an incident, and then everyone's past role gone into in nit-picking detail.

Out of interest did these failings apply to the whole industry or was Great Western particularly bad?

In the late 90’s I used to semi-regularly spend a few hours at Reading and it was rare for London bound HSTs to depart with all their doors properly closed. Normally at least 1 or 2 were on the latch and a dispatcher would kick it closed as it passed. I don’t remember seeing that elsewhere, and definitely not on virtually every train, so Great Western’s attitude to safety seemed slack even to a casual observer.

 

[AJD]

I must admit I do find it interesting how train driving has risen up the ranks to become the "dream job" that many declare it to be. Recently I've found that when trainees report to the depot there's little to no enthusiasm for the job itself, but rather just questions surrounding the pay and conditions. I've met many who say that they've been holding out for a drivers job for x years and when I query why they didn't consider joining as a dispatcher or guard first, they look at me as if I handed them a dead cat. Often continue their training with the mentality that certain grades are beneath them.

One of the TOCs I used to work for allowed drivers to wear polos or shirt/tie. I went with the latter and a trainee who was close to the end of his driving hours took a look at me and with blatant condescension in his voice said "why do you look like a guard? "

Many, myself included, don't have a lot of faith in the current process. The nepotism is still there, to a degree, but it isn't so much sons/daughters of current drivers. Emergency service workers seem to be scooping up vacancies and the ones I've met have eventually admitted to being coached through the process by their mate who came in on the last intake, who in turn was coached by their mate who came in the year before and so forth. I was sat with one lad at the depot (ex police) who said his best mate from his previous job was due a DMI and had applied once he'd given him the full low down on the hours, pay, conditions etc.

However I believe the company have now become wise to this.

 

[John Bishop]

I must admit I do find it interesting how train driving has risen up the ranks to become the "dream job" that many declare it to be. Recently I've found that when trainees report to the depot there's little to no enthusiasm for the job itself, but rather just questions surrounding the pay and conditions. I've met many who say that they've been holding out for a drivers job for x years and when I query why they didn't consider joining as a dispatcher or guard first, they look at me as if I handed them a dead cat. Often continue their training with the mentality that certain grades are beneath them.

One of the TOCs I used to work for allowed drivers to wear polos or shirt/tie. I went with the latter and a trainee who was close to the end of his driving hours took a look at me and with blatant condescension in his voice said "why do you look like a guard? "

Many, myself included, don't have a lot of faith in the current process. The nepotism is still there, to a degree, but it isn't so much sons/daughters of current drivers. Emergency service workers seem to be scooping up vacancies and the ones I've met have eventually admitted to being coached through the process by their mate who came in on the last intake, who in turn was coached by their mate who came in the year before and so forth. I was sat with one lad at the depot (ex police) who said his best mate from his previous job was due a DMI and had applied once he'd given him the full low down on the hours, pay, conditions etc.

However I believe the company have now become wise to this.

The problem with the current system is there is a very low barrier to entry. So with the high salary and great Ts and Cs associated with the role, it’s little wonder there is huge demand for a Driver role. Now granted, most of those who apply will not pass the tests but nevertheless, this factor still produces the huge interest and sheer volume of applications which was never the case years ago.

It’s hard to ignore the fact that the salary on offer is probably the only reason many people apply for the role. For some applicants it could well be 3 times their current salary which is not insignificant.

With regards to Emergency services applying, I would say the current process is designed to measure individual performance in some areas which cannot be learned or pre-practiced. Yes you can practice GB tests till your hearts content and the MMI can be well researched, pre planned long before the day but most of the others you can’t really practice or learn them. You either have the skills or you don’t.

There’s no getting away from the fact that Emergency service personnel have an abundance of safety critical environment experience and personal examples to help them through the process especially the MMI. As to their suitability for the actual job role, I cannot comment on that aspect.

 

[michael74]

I've met many who say that they've been holding out for a drivers job for x years and when I query why they didn't consider joining as a dispatcher or coached through the process by their mate who came in on the last intake, who in turn was coached by their mate who came in the year before and so forth. I was sat with one lad at the depot (ex police) who said his best mate from his previous job was due a DMI and had applied once he'd given him the full low down on the hours, pay, conditions etc...

Playing devils advocate here, a lot of what you said can be done on this very forum.

 

[AverageJoe]

I must admit I do find it interesting how train driving has risen up the ranks to become the "dream job" that many declare it to be. Recently I've found that when trainees report to the depot there's little to no enthusiasm for the job itself, but rather just questions surrounding the pay and conditions. I've met many who say that they've been holding out for a drivers job for x years and when I query why they didn't consider joining as a dispatcher or guard first, they look at me as if I handed them a dead cat. Often continue their training with the mentality that certain grades are beneath them.

One of the TOCs I used to work for allowed drivers to wear polos or shirt/tie. I went with the latter and a trainee who was close to the end of his driving hours took a look at me and with blatant condescension in his voice said "why do you look like a guard? "

Many, myself included, don't have a lot of faith in the current process. The nepotism is still there, to a degree, but it isn't so much sons/daughters of current drivers. Emergency service workers seem to be scooping up vacancies and the ones I've met have eventually admitted to being coached through the process by their mate who came in on the last intake, who in turn was coached by their mate who came in the year before and so forth. I was sat with one lad at the depot (ex police) who said his best mate from his previous job was due a DMI and had applied once he'd given him the full low down on the hours, pay, conditions etc.

However I believe the company have now become wise to this.

I’m a tram driver, I’m certainly no train spotter and train/tram driving is not my dream job, my dream job is retirement

Many at my company are train/tram enthusiasts, however I am still dedicated to my work and consider myself very professional.

I will soon hopefully be starting with a TOC and you won’t see me skipping and jumping into the depot in pure delight, but I am grateful for the opportunity to start a lifelong career and I will continue to be professional and do the job to the best of my ability and if I’m being honest I am excited to start and I do enjoy my current job on most occasions.

I think those who love the job should be really happy about that, but also remember it’s still a job and many come in looking to pay the bills and get back to family life asap.

There’s nothing wrong with that as long as the job is done correctly and safely and the TOC is happy with what the employee contributes to the company.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Dependant on where you were , and of course a particular time.

Take South Wales in the late 1970's , "secondmen" retired in that grade , having never made it to driver , as the industry downsized and became "more efficient" , though had they moved to say the London area , they would have got a drivers key very quickly.

On the other hand , you could be lucky - as a workmate got a driver trainee job in Darlington in the same era as someone realised they had a slew of retirements coming up - so they recruited locally off the street (his previous job was working in a department store !)

 

[ALPAL]

Playing devils advocate here, a lot of what you said can be done on this very forum.

I've been perusing these forums for a couple of years and when recently presented with applying to be a trainee driver I naturally further combed the forums for advice and tips, having now passed all I can say it actually wasn't all that helpful in the sense that most successful candidates don't give away too much here which is a good thing. Almost every post with someone asking "can you tell me what tests, and how to pass x test" is responded to with just practice using the practice material, sleep well, breathe slowly and you'll either pass or fail - you either have it or you don't.

Turned out to be true. Seems everyone I went to assessments with was familiar with the forum, 75% failed the psychometrics however, including emergency service workers. Myself, I found many surprises in there which I could never have practiced for - mainly the 2 hand coordination test and the MMI which purposely drifted away from my experience and my "additional questions" probed into situations I'd never have been in before.

 

[Dai Corner]

It's interesting to read here that enthusiasm is considered a good thing for a potential driver to show but apparently it is/was a negative for managers according to another recent thread.

 

[387star]

I must admit I do find it interesting how train driving has risen up the ranks to become the "dream job" that many declare it to be. Recently I've found that when trainees report to the depot there's little to no enthusiasm for the job itself, but rather just questions surrounding the pay and conditions. I've met many who say that they've been holding out for a drivers job for x years and when I query why they didn't consider joining as a dispatcher or guard first, they look at me as if I handed them a dead cat. Often continue their training with the mentality that certain grades are beneath them.

One of the TOCs I used to work for allowed drivers to wear polos or shirt/tie. I went with the latter and a trainee who was close to the end of his driving hours took a look at me and with blatant condescension in his voice said "why do you look like a guard? "

Many, myself included, don't have a lot of faith in the current process. The nepotism is still there, to a degree, but it isn't so much sons/daughters of current drivers. Emergency service workers seem to be scooping up vacancies and the ones I've met have eventually admitted to being coached through the process by their mate who came in on the last intake, who in turn was coached by their mate who came in the year before and so forth. I was sat with one lad at the depot (ex police) who said his best mate from his previous job was due a DMI and had applied once he'd given him the full low down on the hours, pay, conditions etc.

However I believe the company have now become wise to this.

Yes far too many applying just for the money. A trainee on my course said **** the Guards during the DOO dispute. All about the dosh.

However I think the exhausting nature of the role and responsibility can be too much for some . I heard of a trainee who came out in a rash after qualifying as he couldn't deal with the lone nature of the role and all that responsibility

 

[Turtle]

Out of interest did these failings apply to the whole industry or was Great Western particularly bad?

In the late 90’s I used to semi-regularly spend a few hours at Reading and it was rare for London bound HSTs to depart with all their doors properly closed. Normally at least 1 or 2 were on the latch and a dispatcher would kick it closed as it passed. I don’t remember seeing that elsewhere, and definitely not on virtually every train, so Great Western’s attitude to safety seemed slack even to a casual observer.

I saw that happening regularly on Southern Region when the slam door electrics were in use. There was a surprising number of passengers who did not close the doors properly.

 

[hooverboy]

There was a whole cultural shake-up due to the report - a lack of signal sighting exercises, poor risk management, an unfounded wariness of new safety-critical systems, signallers accepting SPADs as "something that happened occasionally", little to no development of non-technical skills for drivers. And as you say, a deep review into driver recruitment and training.

I would say ther has been a cultural shift in general in a lot of industries,not just rail, towards safety first.

The health and safety culture has been a boom industry in itself, with a considerable amount of regulations and assessments/appraisals conducted on a more and more regular basis.I think largely due to the compensation culture due to blame+claim lawyers.People have forgotten the concept of "acceptable risk",which applies even when you cross the road, and tried to stop everything, which is strangling productivity.

Some of it has uses, but there are elements which should be "risk assessed" in themselves.Severity versus likelihood is all well and good, but when the likelihood is minescule it is a very costly exercise trying to de-risk everything out of life.

 

[hooverboy]

I saw that happening regularly on Southern Region when the slam door electrics were in use. There was a surprising number of passengers who did not close the doors properly.

On the old slam door trains it was very common for passengers to alight while the trains were still moving and pulling into the platform.
That's despite the big red warning signs saying "do not open while the train is moving"

 

[ComUtoR]

Turned out to be true. Seems everyone I went to assessments with was familiar with the forum, 75% failed the psychometrics however, including emergency service workers. Myself, I found many surprises in there which I could never have practiced for - mainly the 2 hand coordination test and the MMI which purposely drifted away from my experience and my "additional questions" probed into situations I'd never have been in before.

No matter how many times someone posts that these are 'aptitude tests' or that its almost pointless to spoon feed the MMI answers/questions; nobody listens.


I don't think that train driving is hard to get into. It's one of the most open recruitment process out there. There is almost no barrier to entry that other industries have.

 

[43066]

I must admit I do find it interesting how train driving has risen up the ranks to become the "dream job" that many declare it to be. Recently I've found that when trainees report to the depot there's little to no enthusiasm for the job itself, but rather just questions surrounding the pay and conditions. I've met many who say that they've been holding out for a drivers job for x years and when I query why they didn't consider joining as a dispatcher or guard first, they look at me as if I handed them a dead cat. Often continue their training with the mentality that certain grades are beneath them.

I don’t think it’s necessarily that they consider other grades beneath them, it’s just recognising that they are different jobs. If someone wants to be a driver then surely they are best off holding out for the job they actually want to do? Why would you waste years doing something you don’t really want to do, with the risk that you fail the driver selection anyway, and end up stuck in that job?

In my case I didn’t want to do any other railway job than driving. Had I not got a place on a trainee drivers course I wouldn’t have joined the industry at all.

I think those who love the job should be really happy about that, but also remember it’s still a job and many come in looking to pay the bills and get back to family life asap.

There’s nothing wrong with that as long as the job is done correctly and safely and the TOC is happy with what the employee contributes to the company.

Absolutely.

It's interesting to read here that enthusiasm is considered a good thing for a potential driver to show but apparently it is/was a negative for managers according to another recent thread.

I’m not sure enthusiasm in the sense of standing on platforms taking numbers/plotting is seen as a good thing. Personally I find having an interest in the railways generally helps me get through the demands of the job and “take the rough with the smooth” but it wasn’t something I mentioned at all during the selection process.

If you talk about being a railway enthusiast during the process you’re less likely to be successful, if anything, as enthusiasts generally have a bad reputation amongst operational railway staff. This is often for good reason as a minority behave badly and let down the rest.

Something to be aware of for DM interviews, etc.!

 

[AndyCK]

Wasn't it previously harder to join as a Driver based on certain medical standards? As an example, I seem to recall that there used to be more stringent standards for eyesight and you had to have a certain level of vision without glasses, whereas I believe (although happy to be corrected) this is now no longer the case as long as you wear glasses if you are prescribed them